Internal emails: Chandler police chief's residency compliance discussed as voters could decide on rule change

CHANDLER, Ariz. - Is the City of Chandler pushing to change the rules for its top cop and other department leaders? FOX 10 asked that question as current policy mandates that all department heads must move into the city within six months of taking the job. But internal records obtained show this issue was raised a year ago with Police Chief Bryan Chapman.

The backstory:

"Good afternoon, my name is Bryan Chapman. It's a pleasure to be here, and it's a real pleasure to have to go first in this environment. I have been, I currently serve as an assistant chief in the Phoenix Police Department," Chapman said.

That was Chapman on Feb. 1, 2024, a finalist to be the chief of Chandler Police. He made it out of the final round and the city announced his hiring the very next month. Two years after taking the job under a city charter requiring residency, the chief maintains ties to another community while city officials claim that renting in Chandler satisfies the requirement. It was learned through multiple city of Chandler sources that Chapman's primary residence may not be in Chandler.

"I tried multiple times in 2014 to purchase a house in the city of Chandler and kept getting out bid, so I ended up in Ahwatukee for the last 10 years," Chapman said.

Chapman owns a home in Ahwatukee, about 20 minutes away from Chandler Police headquarters. Chandler's city charter explicitly states that department heads must become residents of the city within six months of being appointed. That means Chapman had until the fall of 2024 to comply.

What we know:

Fast-forward to June 6, 2025, when former City Manager Joshua Wright emailed Chapman with the subject line: "RESIDENCY REQUIREMENT – CHARTER COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE," which was obtained through an open records request. In this email, Wright says Chapman has "taken specific steps to comply with both the letter and spirit of the charter provision." Wright goes on to say the chief maintained a residential lease within Chandler, while owning his Ahwatukee home.

"A lot of time has been spent in the City of Chandler, from open spaces and kids' activities to... dining out and losing a lot of golf balls on the golf courses spread out through this fine city. It's a special place," Chapman said.

But one week after Wright's email to the chief, the city council adopted an ordinance to form an advisory committee. Its purpose was to review the charter and make recommendations for potential changes. Through another records request, an email sent to current City Manager John Pombier earlier this month was obtained. The unnamed tipster alleges that Chapman's rental is used by his son and that Chapman commutes from Phoenix to Chandler. According to the email, the tipster suggests that GPS data tracked with devices in city vehicles can prove it.

Dig deeper:

Meanwhile, a charter amendment changing residency requirements will be on the November 2026 ballot, one of four proposed amendments. If this residency requirement change is approved by Chandler voters, only the city manager and other positions appointed by city council, including city attorney, clerk and magistrate, must be residents within 12 months of appointment instead of six, which would no longer apply to Chapman or other department heads. But all city employees would still have to live within a "reasonable distance" of the city.

What they're saying:

The city's communications director responded to some questions about the charter, saying "owning or leasing property in Chandler satisfies the residency requirement" and that "all department directors" are aware. The city also says plans to form the charter amendment resident advisory committee started in early 2025, before the former city manager's memo to Chapman about compliance. 

A spokesperson said the city is aware of the claim that Chapman's son lives in his rental, but points back to owning or leasing property as a satisfaction with the residency code.

Chandler City Manager John Pombier statement

"The residency status of the police chief, as it would be with any department director subject to the charter requirement, is a personnel matter, that is handled by myself as the city manager. I became aware of this matter upon receiving an anonymous email on June 3, 2026. I reviewed the situation and informed the City Council for the first time of the existence of the June 6, 2025, memo drafted by the previous city manager regarding the residency status of the police chief. I have addressed the residency requirement with the police chief. As such, this personnel matter has been resolved, fulfilling the charter requirement and City Council’s expectations that department directors reside in Chandler."

Chandler Councilman OD Harris

"I took an oath to this charter and I feel I need to provide this information in the spirit of transparency and accountability, as I have recently learned additional facts regarding conversations with then-City Manager Wright and Chief Bryan Chapman, and how the various pieces may have come together. As an elected official, I believe I have a moral obligation to share what I know with the public. A whistleblower in the city came forward to alert of this issue and no retaliation will come of this person if ever made known.

On May 22, 2025, I raised concerns at a City Council meeting, directly with then-City Manager Josh Wright, regarding Charter compliance and made it clear that the Chandler City Charter must be followed. Deputy City Attorney Tawn was present during that discussion, and City Attorney Kelly Schwab was aware of the charter concerns that were raised. At that time, I made it clear that city leadership had a responsibility to align its actions with the Charter and that compliance with the Charter was not optional.

Approximately two weeks later, following an inquiry from Police Chief Bryan Chapman regarding the residency requirement, a memorandum titled "Assurance of Compliance" was issued. That memo provided an undermining interpretation of the Charter that appears inconsistent with its plain language and intent and created additional questions regarding compliance with the residency requirement. In my view, the memo did not align with the spirit of the Charter and raised concerns about whether the residency requirement was being applied as voters intended.

I believe accountability exists at multiple levels.
I hold Chief Bryan Chapman accountable for the inquiry he made and for understanding the expectations associated with the position he accepted. During the recruitment and interview process, the expectation that the Police Chief would reside in Chandler was discussed with members of the City Council. This statement was in a clear document he received upon accepting a special payment. It was my understanding that residency in Chandler was an important expectation of the position and was consistent with the Charter’s requirements. I would have expected residency to be fulfilled following his hiring in April 2024.

I also recognize that provisions were made to support compliance. The former City Manager authorized a payment intended to assist with relocation or moving-related expenses. Shortly thereafter, additional compensation adjustments were approved by the city manager, not the council. While personnel decisions are within the authority of the City Manager and not the City Council, I believe those actions reflected an intent to support compliance with the residency requirement.

As a matter of public record, Chief Bryan Chapman’s compensation is. In April, 2024, when he was hired, he received an after-tax signing incentive of $20,000 authorized by then-City Manager Josh Wright. All raises by the former city manager were given to the Chief by Josh. Effective July 1, 2024, his pay became $251,326. On June 1, 2025, he received a 10 percent raise, bringing his salary to $276,931. On July 1, 2025, he received an additional $31,000 in pay, bringing his total compensation to $282,484, surpassing his current supervisor’s salary of approximately $275,000.

After Charter concerns were raised on May 22, 2025, I would have expected city leadership to move toward greater compliance and clarity, not an interpretation that generated additional questions. Mr. Wright should have known better, given the concerns already raised regarding Charter compliance.
It is also important to acknowledge that this issue came to light when a whistleblower raised concerns with city leadership. Whistleblowers play an important role in government accountability. Let me be clear: individuals who raise concerns in good faith should be protected from retaliation. Chandler must continue to foster a culture in which employees and residents can raise concerns without fear of reprisal. Transparency and accountability depend on people being willing to speak up when they believe something is wrong.
My concern is not about personalities. My concern is about governance. The Chandler City Charter is the governing document adopted by the voters, and city officials are responsible for following it as written and 
ensuring that city actions align with the Charter.

The current City Manager, John, has recently become aware of the situation and has communicated with the Council. However, personnel matters remain within the authority of the City Manager, not the City Council. My role is to ensure accountability, transparency, and adherence to the Charter.
The residents of Chandler deserve transparency, accountability, and confidence that the city’s governing documents are being followed. The expectation is simple: align with the Charter, follow the Charter, and uphold the trust that the voters have placed in their government."

City of Chandler Vice Mayor, Angel Encinas, statement

"I and the City Council understood the Police Chief had leased a residence in Chandler and was physically living there in compliance with the residency requirement in the City Charter. Recently learning how a memo from the previous city manager had addressed the matter did not meet the expectations of the Charter or the City Council. Once we became aware that residency was not being met, our current City Manager acted promptly to address the matter.

I have consistently supported requiring city leadership and [department] directors to live in Chandler and voted against the proposed charter amendment that would remove that requirement. That amendment change is now up to Chandler voters to decide." 

What you can do:

Residents can weigh in on this proposed amendment by submitting a comment form provided on the city's website.

InvestigationsChandlerNews